That is a load of bollocks. Jayasuriya wasn't that good of a captain, Kallis rarely captained at all and Richards wasn't much chop with the ball. I don't think the likes of Keith Miller and Kallis captained all that much at test level either.
Klusener is clearly a far better bowler or batsman than Symonds is bowler. Symonds, as I've said before, is not a good all-round cricketer - he's a batsman who bowls, and not very well. Any decent batsman will smash Symonds without much difficulty.
Can't say Klusener is a better bowler than Kallis I'm afraid, they're both equal amounts of a disappointment. And as for batsmen - there's really no comparison. Klusener, as I said, did the job he did better than anyone, but the job of a top-order batsman, in building an innings and often seeing-off the new-ball, is notably more difficult than end-of-innings hitting.
I must say I'm unaware of him bowling much if at all at the death - certainly he didn't between 1998 and 2003/04. Klusener was never a good death-bowler when I watched, he was not one who aimed good Yorkers. Donald and Kallis, early on, then later no-one (death-bowling has been a big problem for South Africa recently) did brilliantly, but Klusener was always an early-middle-overs specialist when I watched.
That is intersting by you, but I do get the feelign overall you will say that Klusener>Kallis? Am I right? I'm going to ding it hard to argue that Klusener is better than Kallis at the moment as I am unable to access statistics that I want to, but simply, Kallis has not played as many match winning inning sas Kallis. Add to the fact that Klusener has achieved such feats at the lowly batting positions of 6-8, while Kallis has had the favourable positions to score his runs.
I seem to remember him bowl at the death as often as Donald and Pollock, probably more so than Pollock if my memory serves me correctly. You seem to be rather harsh with your RPO, but considering that he is rapid and skilled enough to open the bowling must surely say that he is a better bowler than his 4.7 lets on.
Indeed, Pollock was almost never a particularly good death-bowler at all.
I'm more expectant than some. Too many in recent times have, in my view, accepted mediocrity. One small reason why 4.7-an-over is so common these days is because people allow it to be so.
I'd say he could have been better - I think beyond doubt that he was easily good enough to have an economy-rate in the 4.3-4.4-an-over range. But he didn't. This is disappointing, but the fact of the matter is that Klusener did not bowl as well as I think he could have.
Kallis has not played as many match-winning inning sas Kallis? ITSTL.
well, TBH I don't think so. He may not have played as many dramatic match-turning-in-4-or-5-overs innings as Klusener, but I do think his runs have made many massive contributions to South Africa both winning and losing by smaller margins than they otherwise would have.
Not if the bowlers on the opposition side go for 4.2-4.3-an-over, though, that's the point.
Jayasuriya > Klusener with the bat. Klusener > Jayasuriya with the ball. But Jayasuriya >>> Klusener in the field.
Another load of bollocks,and you are getting more sillier
ST Jayasuriya 1998-2003 118 66 47 2 3 58.26
MS Atapattu 2001-2006 63 35 27 0 1 56.45
DPMD Jayawardene 2004-2008 67 37 25 0 5 59.67
Invalidating one of his examples doesn't significantly challenge his point, though; by your own criteria, none of the others is a 'complete player'. In fact, by your criteria, there are barely any players who are 'complete players'.
You cannot find a complete player. It's how they are close to the completeness. We know that Tendulkar is a gun ODI batter, useful bowler and a fieldsman, Ok with his behavior, but his captaincy really sucked. That's why I don't regard him as a "complete" player as Richards, Kallis, Pollock or Jayasuriya. (Kapil Dev for that matter).
Geez, defensive much? Why so obnoxious?You cannot find a complete player. It's how they are close to the completeness. We know that Tendulkar is a gun ODI batter, useful bowler and a fieldsman, Ok with his behavior, but his captaincy really sucked. That's why I don't regard him as a "complete" player as Richards, Kallis, Pollock or Jayasuriya. (Kapil Dev for that matter).
This is strictly my criteria to find out who were the best ODI players in the histry. Your right to disagree is accepted.